Monday, July 27, 2015

Herschel Smith on "Recruiting Center Negligent Discharge Discussion At Oath Keepers."

"All in all, the entire exchange of comments at this Oath Keepers discussion thread is technically and tactically juvenile, and the tone is highly disappointing. I expected better."


James Hanna said...

Why did he expect better? He already admitted that the posters could be trolls, but then he went on as if the comments are a direct reflection on the Oath Keepers membership. Anyone with an internet connection can comment on those website articles.

Another self-appointed tongue-clucker sweeping friendlies is JUST what we need. Screw that guy.

Anonymous said...

Hard to disagree with any of his comments.

Arkindole said...

Spot on; last sentence second to last para.

Besides, what's the odds that some nutcake will hit a recruiting center again? Pretty much zero. Bet your paycheck if you're feeling frisky or if you feel like stirring up some mac n cheese. What's the odds for another new and improved gun-free killing zone? A whole lot more. Keep thinking about the 4GW terrorist insurgency thingy.

Bad Cyborg said...

Here's what I posted in response to Herschel's essay:

"if you cannot trust yourself to carry a weapon with a round chambered because you want to handle it or touch it or are afraid you’re going to stick your finger inside the trigger guard, you probably shouldn’t have the gun to begin with. Something is wrong with you."

+10K to that, Herschel. Somebody like that doesn't need a gun, they need a KEEPER! I worked armed security for a few years and almost the only time I put my hand on my sidearm was when I was about to draw the thing (which I had to do a couple of time. never discharged it LOD, thank heaven). A couple of times I DID lay my hand on the grip (fingers NOT around it), lean in and - in response to "no ingles" (which is not uncommon here in South Texas) - ask "Habla Glock?". Funny thing there. The answer was ALWAYS, "Oh, si! Si! Habla Glock!" and, suddenly and mysteriously, they developed a facility for English. Imagine that. ;-)

Anonymous said...

Here are Jeff Cooper's 4 simple rules of gun safety. The best thing about them is that 2 or more of these rules have to be violated to accidentally shoot anyone or any thing:
1. All guns are always loaded.
2. Never point the muzzle of a gun towards anything you don't want to destroy.
3. Properly identify your target. Don't shoot at anything you can't clearly see.
4. Don't touch the trigger until the muzzle is pointed toward a properly-identified target you intend to shoot.
Before I teach anyone how to shoot, I insist that they memorize those rules.
- Old Greybeard

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know what a safety is?

Anonymous said...

to me a negligent discharge is like picking your nose in public - all you had to do was keep your finger out of the hole and you wouldn't have looked like an ass. Is that really too much to ask?

Roger said...

As with any forum, the Oath Keepers forum has it's share of..uh...challenged individuals. I don't even go there anymore. The same reason I no longer frequent one of the more popular NW Gun Forums.

Anonymous said...

So if someone is shooting at you from a position of camouflage (meaning that you cannot see them for identification purposes) you cannot shoot back in defense? Cmon now, Old Greybeard. Going out into the weeds a bit there wouldn't you say? A target identified is not always a target that can be "see".

As an aside, my eldest just finished up boot camp. A handful of recruits were rolled back several weeks in basic training because their gun safety/gun handling practices were so lacking as to be unacceptable. Modern gun control has accomplished the very thing that the Second Amendment listed as a danger. Even the most rudimentary skills are not possessed by youngsters today BECAUSE of gun control.

Going out into the weeds, whether honestly or nefariously, is exactly the cause. The road to hell is paved with good intentions as much as it is with bad ones.

Here is the truth of the matter. That a negligent discharge happens, or not, is not germane to anyone's right to arms. As it is with crime "rates", it simply isn't germane to the right to arms. So why take the bait? For sure, it can be discussed as the outlier that it is, but that is all it is. An outlier. A meaningless statistic that has zero bearing, no effect, upon the right to keep and bear arms.

Galaxie_Man said...

I am always CONDITION ONE! (Condition 1: A round chambered, full magazine in place, hammer/striker cocked, safety on [if there is a manual safety.])

IMHO, carrying for personal defense any other way is useless and downright stupid. If you are unable to or uncomfortable doing so.....leave the firearm at home.

"Time out Mr. Bad guy, while I make my means of defense ready against your wickedness"

Nemesis said...

Generally speaking the cause of a negligent discharge may always be traced back to the mishandling of the weapon. For example, a holstered firearm should remain holstered unless it is drawn to be, a. Used, or b. For cleaning purposes. Loaded weaponry are not toys for pawing over and should not be treated as such.

Pistols are holstered for a reason and that reasoning has to be firmly understood and practised by those carrying. Place your hand on the pistol and withdraw while keeping the trigger finger outside of the trigger guard - basic safety rule.

To Anonymous at 10:19 AM - not all pistols have a separate safety device.